[RoundTableKnight]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Today, in south FL where I am, 95 is between 6 and 8 lanes in each direction. It is now completely filled with traffic.

Is that true?

[SteveM85]

Originally Posted by CTartist

I thought I read a few weeks ago that if this goes through Fairfield County gets 4 lanes on I-95 from Greenwich to Fairfield. That would be AWESOME and what I have been saying for years on here.

Does anyone know if that is still true?

It would be incredibly awesome, all the way to New Haven, in conjunction with improved mass transit. Both, not one or the other. The demand is beyond induced, whether you build or not, they're still coming no matter what.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by RoundTableKnight

Is that true?

It is, and it’s wild. And they just took the left two lanes to make them “Lexus lanes”, which many call them, meaning they are toll lanes to avoid traffic in the right 4 lanes. Problem is, the toll lanes are now filled with traffic too.

This is why mass transit needs to be a priority - not adding lanes. Widen shoulders, modernize on and off ramps, but for the love of god, don’t widen.

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

This is why mass transit needs to be a priority - not adding lanes. Widen shoulders, modernize on and off ramps, but for the love of god, don’t widen.

Said the person who I believe is retired lol.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by CTartist

Said the person who I believe is retired lol.

I wish - anyone who can retire in their mid 30’s is doing something right. I have a good 15 years left of my career before I’m eligible to retire.

[SteveM85]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

I wish - anyone who can retire in their mid 30’s is doing something right. I have a good 15 years left of my career before I’m eligible to retire.

What's the labor charge on having 18 spark plugs changed every year?
Those Invincibles with 48 spark plugs, my God people are loaded in S FL.

One lane in each direction would go a long way here. I don't think we need drastic measures.
If it brings even more business and economy then all the better. It's rippin' here.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

It is, and it’s wild. And they just took the left two lanes to make them “Lexus lanes”, which many call them, meaning they are toll lanes to avoid traffic in the right 4 lanes. Problem is, the toll lanes are now filled with traffic too.

This is why mass transit needs to be a priority - not adding lanes. Widen shoulders, modernize on and off ramps, but for the love of god, don’t widen.

Oh please, that is no excuse for doing nothing.

I’ve been fighting the “Induced Congestion” argument for decades now. It’s just ridiculous. Traffic is not an infinite commodity. Unlike southern Florida or California where this argument originated, Connecticut is a mature state with little room for significant new growth so the chances of traffic growing that much is pretty slim.

The best answer is a balanced approach where you balance on form of transportation. For a couple decades now Connecticut has been significantly investing in its rail lines with Metro North, Shoreline East and CTrail. Governor Lamont has laid out a very ambitious plan to continue to invest in these including multi billion dollar improvements on the New Haven line. Add in the investments in CT Transit, CTfastrak and other local transit agencies, and you see the state is well covered for mass transit.

I-95 was designed and built more than 65 years ago. A LOT has changed since then. It is more than well past due that I-95 be brought up to modern standards like full shoulders on both sides of the highway, longer entrance ramps, greater distances between interchanges, modern drainage, etc. I’m not saying it should be widened to 12 lanes but it would be smart to add a lane or two to relieve congestion. Jay

[WouldLoveTo]

Originally Posted by JayCT

So with Congressional approval of President Biden’s infrastructure bill, it mean billions of dollars pouring into our state over the next five years. Amount the projects anticipated to be funded and moving to construction are:

- Rehabilitation of the northbound Gold Star Bridge in New London and Groton
- Reconstruction of the I-91/I-691/Route 66 interchange in Meriden
- Widening I-84 in Danbury
- Widening I-95 in Fairfield County
- Design of a new I-84/I-91 interchange in Hartford
- Replacement of Amtrak Railroad Bridge over the Connecticut River in Old Saybrook and Old Lyme
- Track Realignment Metro North New Haven Line in Fairfield County

https://www.ctinsider.com/news/artic...e-16604189.php

Didn't that recently get redesigned?

Or are they now hoping to get the tunnels done? (personally I'm against that one)

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Oh please, that is no excuse for doing nothing.

I’ve been fighting the “Induced Congestion” argument for decades now. It’s just ridiculous. Traffic is not an infinite commodity. Unlike southern Florida or California where this argument originated, Connecticut is a mature state with little room for significant new growth so the chances of traffic growing that much is pretty slim.

The best answer is a balanced approach where you balance on form of transportation. For a couple decades now Connecticut has been significantly investing in its rail lines with Metro North, Shoreline East and CTrail. Governor Lamont has laid out a very ambitious plan to continue to invest in these including multi billion dollar improvements on the New Haven line. Add in the investments in CT Transit, CTfastrak and other local transit agencies, and you see the state is well covered for mass transit.

I-95 was designed and built more than 65 years ago. A LOT has changed since then. It is more than well past due that I-95 be brought up to modern standards like full shoulders on both sides of the highway, longer entrance ramps, greater distances between interchanges, modern drainage, etc. I’m not saying it should be widened to 12 lanes but it would be smart to add a lane or two to relieve congestion. Jay

I'm kind of curious about why you don't think induced demand happens.

Anyhow, one thing that's generally true is that adding more lanes generally doesn't proportionally add as much throughput with the more lanes you add given how on and off ramps generally work and the weaving that takes place.

I do think generally the US including even the northeast has had a fairly imbalanced approach in the last several decades and that the addition of frequent, all-day, bi-directional service along all branches and having them electrified would result in far greater throughput than lane widening on an existing highway would add. I do think there is something to be said for certain kinds of redesigns though.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

I'm kind of curious about why you don't think induced demand happens.

Anyhow, one thing that's generally true is that adding more lanes generally doesn't proportionally add as much throughput with the more lanes you add given how on and off ramps generally work and the weaving that takes place.

I do think generally the US including even the northeast has had a fairly imbalanced approach in the last several decades and that the addition of frequent, all-day, bi-directional service along all branches and having them electrified would result in far greater throughput than lane widening on an existing highway would add. I do think there is something to be said for certain kinds of redesigns though.

Under the theory presented, all additional lanes added will get filled with traffic no matter what. That assumes that traffic is an infinite number. It’s not. It’s a function of population and development. I think we all can agree that neither has been or will be growing that much in coming years.

As an example, lets take I-95. It is currently three lanes in each direction from New Haven to New York. Let’s say we double it’s capacity to six lanes in each direction. Under the Induced Demand argument it would fill with traffic. Do you really think that traffic will double on that highway without significant new development or a drastic increase in population? That’s just not happening given Connecticut’s strong zoning, local rule and desire to maintain its character.

It’s an absurd example but does show why Induced Demand isn’t quite right either. It’s a theory based on data from Southern California in the 1960’s and 1970’s when and where there was great capacity for development and population growth. That’s why it’s not a comparable argument here in Connecticut. Jay